It was the few seconds of footage that summed up the state of modern Britain and its beleaguered justice system.
A green dumpster, half full and on fire being pushed with difficulty by a gang of youths across a rubble-strewn road towards a line of nervy-looking riot police.
Cold, but impotent rage on the streets of Southampton was met by a police force tied up in knots with rules and regulations, terrified to put a foot wrong. It's why tragedies like Henry Nowak happen. And it's why they looked petrified to come out from behind the riot shields as the missiles rained down and the bin approached.
It's understandable to look at what has played out - politically and socially since Vickrum Digwa was found guilty - and lose hope. Henry Nowak’s young life needlessly lost. Anger on the streets with police, politicians, judges and the judicial system itself all in the firing line. But once the rage dies down, we must realise that - and you might think I'm mad for saying it - vital, key parts of the system have succeeded.
Think about it, how do you know what happened to that poor young man? Think about it, how is his killer now serving at least 21 years behind bars? It's because of a free media and it's because of a jury system.
Neither are perfect, we know that, but nothing connected to humans ever can be. Anyone who says otherwise is either lying to you or kidding themselves. Both still work. But only just. And we’d be crazy to let politicians do any more damage to either. Sometimes cases can go quietly under the radar. After all, in the days after Henry’s callous murder on December 3, did you hear anything about the horrors of what had played out that night in Southampton?
As you and your family started to think about Christmas, Henry’s, grieving with quiet dignity while hoping justice was done, were coming to terms with facing their first without him.
I can't imagine what pain they felt when they heard Digwa would plead not guilty and would fight his case in front of a jury of people like you and me. But without that we may never have known about the scandal that occurred.
'Not every aspect of our society is that green, fiery dumpster, rolling out of control,' writes GB News' Editorial Director
|PA
Henry's horrific ordeal only started to emerge a few weeks ago in news reports from early evidence in the case. People started to sit up and notice that something important was happening in that courtroom and that it needed wider scrutiny. It was that evidence - in front of a jury and free press - which first showed how a dying Henry had been cuffed that night, wrongly suspected of being a racist aggressor while his murderer cruelly stood by.
The jury was able to listen to the evidence and see through Digwa's wicked lies. And a wider audience heard about it thanks to the press able to report on it. The jury saw through his plea of self-defence. But it was his lawful right to do so. Like it or not we have to preserve that right like our lives depend on it. After all, they do depend on it. That's why the Government's proposed changes to jury trials should chill you. Let's be clear, those changes would NOT have directly affected this case.
The Ministry of Justice's Crime and Tribunals bill - explicitly protects - for now - the right to a jury for the most severe criminal acts like murder and manslaughter. But to many - and it should be for all of us - it's the thin end of the wedge. After all, if I was facing the prospect of jail - whatever level of crime - I'd want my case to be heard by a jury of peers - not be at the mercy of a single man or woman. I’d also want the press to be able to report on it. We must also protect this right even if we don't always like the results.
In the same week Henry's killer was found guilty, two brothers were told they would not face a second retrial over allegations of attacking a police officer at Manchester airport. Two juries had not been able to decide. Would a third find any different? Would it be fair and just to go through it all again?
There was anger and demands to change the law in light of the decision not to proceed again. But changing laws should never be done lightly. They are there to protect us all. You can't keep trying someone because you don't like the result. It's not just. It's not British.
There's a scene in the Oscar-winning film 'A Man For All Seasons' when Sir Thomas More makes just that point. A hot-headed family friend tells More he'd be willing to 'cut down every law in England' to 'get after the Devil.' Sir Thomas, ultimately executed by Henry VIII for refusing to back his divorce, said: "Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide... the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! I'd give the Devil the benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"
The need to preserve our free press is all the more pressing in the light of what happens at Southampton Crown Court.
Critics of organisations like GB News see us as akin to the Devil because they don’t like what we stand for. They’d want us more tightly regulated or even run out of business if they got their way. But without GB News and the other members of the free, British press highlighting the inadequacies of Britain's DEI-obsessed modern police forces, positive change in Henry’s name would never come.
It’s understandable to get angry and feel hopeless. But not every aspect of our society is that green, fiery dumpster, rolling out of control. But we MUST fight to preserve what’s good and what still works in Britain. Chip away at a free press and a jury system even more, and we will all be left at the mercy of the Devil.
The danger is we won't see him coming and we won't feel rage - cold, hot or otherwise. Why? Because without a jury hearing evidence and a free press there to report it, we’d never have known what the Devil had been doing in the first place.